#RapeUK

I am just sat here listening to Prime Minister's Questions.

A discussion just ensued regarding the shocking prosecution and conviction rates relating to accusations of rape made to the police.

The diabolical statistic is less than 2% of rape cases reported to police result in prosecution and successful conviction.

Everyone agrees this is shocking - it is horrendous. Everyone wants every man who rapes a woman to be prosecuted, found guilty and given a custodial sentence for a very long time. 

Everyone wants every woman to have unequivocal confidence in the legal system that when they report rape they will be treated seriously and compassionately and that the presumption will be they are telling the truth. 

So if everyone agrees that - why is it not happening? 

Why are conviction rates so horribly low. Why are women being left so disillusioned and in many cases so angry?

It seems it comes down to one thing - burden of proof - our legal system - innocent until proved guilty. 

Of course men usually claim consent in defence - and as most often there is only 2 people involved how do you prove it was not consensual (beyond a reasonable doubt) when it is one word against another. How do you establish beyond reasonable doubt that a diabolical crime has been committed? 

This is the great problem. This is the reason so many rape accusations are not even taken to court because the police and particularly the Crown Prosecution Service realise the case has little or no chance of success. 

Apparently one reason for the drop in the number of cases taken to court is the CPS have taken the view it is even worse for a woman to go to court and lose than not to go to court at all.

This is all dreadful. Longer sentences for rape convictions are not going to be the deterrent we all hope they will be if the conviction rate is so ridiculously and unacceptably low. In fact it is possible indeed likely, that the diabolical conviction rates might give confidence to rapists. 

So what can be done? This issue has been wrestled with for years and no one has been able to find a workable and acceptable answer.

It seems to me there is only 2 possible answers :

1) you can find a way of obtaining proof that is enough for a conviction under current legal rules.

or 

2) the burden of proof is reduced or the emphasis changed. 

Starting with option 1). How can proof be obtained in a 1 to 1 situation ? The only thing I can think of is the man is required to produce evidence it was consensual in the form of written or recorded evidence. (most people carry a mobile phone). I am not sure if this is practical - certainly not romantic - but a sort of pre nuptial. The man has to prove it was consensual. I am sure this would be highly problematic in practice.

This leads to 2). The burden of proof changes. It could go from innocent until proved guilty to guilty until proved innocent - or possibly the plaintiff is given the benefit of a reasonable doubt - rather than the defendant.

This is the change many campaigners want to see. The problem is it turns the whole premise of our legal system on its head - guilty until proved innocent or guilty if  there is reasonable doubt (rather than innocent). For many - maybe for the majority - this is a step too far however much they feel the situation regarding rape convictions is wrong. Some argue however that a woman must be believed and / or as men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators of rape they must be the ones that suffer one way or another (not women) !

Are we prepared as a society to increase the chances of hanging an innocent man by lowering the bar to establish guilt? 

Some will argue we should be - because if we don't many men will continue to get away with the terrible crime of rape. Lowering the evidential bar will mean a certain % of convicted men will be innocent - but that is the price worth paying for the greater good!

This is pure speculation on my part. There are about 50000 reported rapes to the police each year. Only 2% of cases are brought to court and convicted.  - so 1000 men. Question - how many of the reported rapes actually occurred? I am going to guess over 90% - so 45000 out of the 50000. That would mean 44000 men per year would be getting away with rape!

Why would a woman claim rape when it is not true? We can speculate. It happens from time to time. Is there a chance that by lowering the evidence threshold more bogus charges might be brought?

In situations like this I try in my own tiny brain to simplify the arguments - to cut to the chase. A brother and sister. The sister is raped but cannot prove it. Just her word. The son is convicted of rape and imprisoned but is innocent. Which is worse. What if you are the parents? 

Everyone wants to see action on rape convictions . But how and what ? The best answer of course is to stop rape happening in the first place. How do you achieve that in reality? That must be for another blog.